Hi Matt, Just to be clear, is the addition of the data_uri on the Location (Google Doc) part of what is being discussed too? Or only the extending semantics for flight location URIs?
I suppose only the second part as per the PR but I wanted to be sure. Thanks, Raúl El mar, 22 abr 2025 a las 2:04, Rusty Conover (<ru...@conover.me.invalid>) escribió: > Looks good to me Matt. > > Rusty > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 19:02 Matt Topol <zotthewiz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Following on from the previous discussion [1] and on the google doc > > [2], I've put up a PR to formally update the documentation in the > > Flight.proto file and the Flight.rst in the Arrow Docs [3]. > > > > Before I start a vote to add this to the Arrow Flight spec formally, I > > thought it might be good to have one last discussion thread for anyone > > to voice any concerns, objections, or otherwise take a look and chime > > in. > > > > For reference, none of the Arrow Flight implementations (to my > > knowledge) actually implement handling of the URIs beyond possibly > > parsing it. The handling of the logic for re-using the flight client > > or creating a new one, or otherwise is always left to the consumer. As > > such, there's no implementations that need to be created in order to > > bring it to a vote as far as I can tell. > > > > Thanks all! > > > > --Matt > > > > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/qmgfzy8ofrdk6bv1rknnnj2ls5cqytzq > > [2]: > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-x7tHWDzpbgmsjtTUnVXeEO4b7vMWDHTu-lzxlK9_hE/edit?tab=t.0 > > [3]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/46194 > > >
